UNLABELLED: Variability in peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography (pQCT) measurement sites limits direct comparisons of results between studies. Further, it is unclear what estimates of bone strength are most indicative of changes due to aging, disease, or interventions. The purpose of this study was to examine age group and sex differences in tibia morphology. Additional purposes of this study were to determine which tibia site or sites are most sensitive for detecting age and sex differences. METHODS: Self-identifying Caucasian men (n=55) and women (n=59) ages 20-59 years and separated by decades had their non-dominant tibias measured with pQCT (Stratec XCT 3000) at every 10% of the limb length from 5% to 85% (distal to proximal). Volumetric BMD and BMC of the total, cortical and trabecular bone were determined, as well as periosteal (PeriC) and endosteal (EndoC) circumferences, and cortical thickness (CTh). RESULTS: There were significant (p<0.01) site effects for all BMC, vBMD, PeriC and EndoC measures. Large sex differences (men>women) in Tot.BMC (21-28%) were paralleled by differences in Cort.BMC (21-25%) (p<0.01). Site∗sex interaction effects were significant (p<0.05) for BMC (peak sex difference: 5%, 15%, 25%, 85% sites) and circumference (peak sex difference: 65% site) variables. CTh and total vBMD were lowest (p<0.05) in 50-59 year group, and EndoC was highest in the 50-59 year group. Site∗age interactions existed for Cort.vBMD, Tot.BMC (85% site), and EndoC (25%, 35%, 55%-85% sites). Correcting for bone free lean body mass (BFLBM) greatly reduced sex differences, eliminating sex∗site interaction effects, but sex main effects remained significant. Correcting for BFLBM did not eliminate age effects. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of age and sex differences in tibia variables varied by measurement site demonstrating the need for standardization of measurement sites.
UNLABELLED: Variability in peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography (pQCT) measurement sites limits direct comparisons of results between studies. Further, it is unclear what estimates of bone strength are most indicative of changes due to aging, disease, or interventions. The purpose of this study was to examine age group and sex differences in tibia morphology. Additional purposes of this study were to determine which tibia site or sites are most sensitive for detecting age and sex differences. METHODS: Self-identifying Caucasian men (n=55) and women (n=59) ages 20-59 years and separated by decades had their non-dominant tibias measured with pQCT (Stratec XCT 3000) at every 10% of the limb length from 5% to 85% (distal to proximal). Volumetric BMD and BMC of the total, cortical and trabecular bone were determined, as well as periosteal (PeriC) and endosteal (EndoC) circumferences, and cortical thickness (CTh). RESULTS: There were significant (p<0.01) site effects for all BMC, vBMD, PeriC and EndoC measures. Large sex differences (men>women) in Tot.BMC (21-28%) were paralleled by differences in Cort.BMC (21-25%) (p<0.01). Site∗sex interaction effects were significant (p<0.05) for BMC (peak sex difference: 5%, 15%, 25%, 85% sites) and circumference (peak sex difference: 65% site) variables. CTh and total vBMD were lowest (p<0.05) in 50-59 year group, and EndoC was highest in the 50-59 year group. Site∗age interactions existed for Cort.vBMD, Tot.BMC (85% site), and EndoC (25%, 35%, 55%-85% sites). Correcting for bone free lean body mass (BFLBM) greatly reduced sex differences, eliminating sex∗site interaction effects, but sex main effects remained significant. Correcting for BFLBM did not eliminate age effects. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of age and sex differences in tibia variables varied by measurement site demonstrating the need for standardization of measurement sites.
Authors: V Seifert-Klauss; T Link; C Heumann; P Luppa; M Haseitl; J Laakmann; J Rattenhuber; M Kiechle Journal: Maturitas Date: 2006-06-15 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Ricardo Francisco Capozza; Sara Feldman; Pablo Mortarino; Paola Soledad Reina; Hans Schiessl; Jörn Rittweger; José Luis Ferretti; Gustavo Roberto Cointry Journal: J Anat Date: 2010-01-28 Impact factor: 2.610
Authors: Rachel K Evans; Charles Negus; Amanda J Antczak; Ran Yanovich; Eran Israeli; Daniel S Moran Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Jennifer Vlok; Peter J Simm; Kate Lycett; Susan A Clifford; Anneke C Grobler; Katherine Lange; Najmi Ismail; William Osborn; Melissa Wake Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-07-04 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Breanne S Baker; Zhaojing Chen; Rebecca D Larson; Michael G Bemben; Debra A Bemben Journal: J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact Date: 2020-03-03 Impact factor: 2.041
Authors: K D Stathopoulos; A B Zoubos; N A Papaioannou; D Mastrokalos; A Galanos; P J Papagelopoulos; G Skarantavos Journal: J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact Date: 2016-06-01 Impact factor: 2.041